The Genius of Invention

[Steve Firth]

Hmmm,

Anyone else regarding this with a mix of hope and dread? Has the potential to be good, but will probably consist of an hour of patronising waffle.

[Nick]

Well it's on now, I hope it turns out to be good, but I have that huge feeling of dread :-(

[Chris Bartram]

Have it recording, it sounds great, but there's always the risk you're right.

[JoeJoe]

There is hope as for a start it is not called "Carol Vorderman's The Genius of Invention" or "Richard Hammond's The Genius of Invention" or similar...

[Grimly Curmudgeon]

I missed the beginning, watched it for three minutes near the end, but revulsion at the presenters drove me away, especially that Blue Peterised woman. I had to check the clock to see if it was actually post 9pm, as I was sure this was misplaced kids' TV.

[Peter Parry]

The future is biomass and PV panels according to the collective idiocy. The word "nuclear" in connection with sustainable electricity generation passed not a lip. The primary presenter now makes a living peddling diet books which apparently allow you to eat what you like.

[Huge]

W-e-e-e-e-e-e-e-e-e-e-e-e-llll. Not entirely true.

[Tim+]

Patronising waffle.

Tim

[jgharston]

That's exactly what I though as it started when they said something like: Fred: I'm Fred, this is Jim Jim: Hello! Fred: and this is Sheila Sheila: Hello!

JGH

[Gordon Henderson]

I turned off when "nerdy but nice" started wafting the tablet thing about to get stuff to move on the big display behind her...

Seriously? Nerdy but nice? WTF?!?

Gordon

[DerbyBorn]

Surely things are only real if they are on an iPad!

The best bit was seeing the turbines as a backdrop.

[jgharston]

I kept thinking: hold your b***y clipboard properly! For several hundred years we've had a perfectly good design for a hold-in-you-hand- and-scribble-on-it object, and what happens, Steve Jobs thinks he can do better and forces people to balance things on their palms.

JGH

[tim.....]

That depends upon your definition of "eat what you like"

if it's:

no food groups are banned, then correct

if it eat as much as you like, then false

It (seems to be) a simple calorie controlled diet

Eat what you like up to a maximum number of calories per day. What's not to work?

(But I could have googled the wrong thing)

tim

>

[tim.....]

I thought actually showing us models of how the things worked was useful.

I have never been able to work that out for myself.

tim

[alan]

Something was very wrong with her presentation style. I found her reaction to the oil demonstration to be very false when pretending that she didn't know what was going to happen. Perhaps she missed the rehearsal but she was aware, without prompting, to stand well away.

She has probably been on a 'medja presenters' course and taught to be a proxy for the thicko members of the public that are watching.

[Reentrant]

No. ADF (if that's what you're referring to) suggests that timing is as least as big a factor as total calories consumed. You can consume more calories over a week than "normal" but restricting two days to 500 calories or less, and therefore eating more the other five days, results in weight loss and other benefits like reduced cholesterol and increased insulin sensitivity. Lots of good evidence to back it up too.

[polygonum]

ADF is interesting. But the idea that a simplistic calorie count "works" is somewhat naive.

[tim.....]

I'm not saying that it is what I googed (as I didn't read it that thoroughly).

But I thought the idea about restricting eating on some days per week was that you didn't eat any more on the other days. (As in you naturally didn't do so, not that specifically tried not to.) I have no idea if it works like that or not.

tim

[tim.....]

Eh!

What's naive about expecting eating less (fattening food) being an effective diet?

How do you think "weight watchers" works? You don't think you lose weight just because you go to motivational meetings do you?

tim

[polygonum]

A diet should provide your required nutrition. An appropriate balance of proteins, carbohydrates, fats, minerals, vitamins, ... Simply dropping the calories does not ensure adequate intakes. Indeed there are some very good reasons to think that an inadequate intake of certain nutrients can make it harder to maintain metabolic rates.

Dropping calorific intake too low can result in the body adjusting to that lower intake and failing to burn up the stored fat effectively.

In another part of my life I am aware of a number of people who had been dedicated low-fat dieters and found that an increase of fat intake - even though that has overall resulted in a higher calorific intake - has resulted in weight loss.